Anarchism and Political Theory: Contemporary Problems
Uri Gordon
Contact uri at riseup dot net
Abstract
This thesis explores contemporary anarchism, in its re-emergence as a social movement and political theory over the past decade. The methodology used combines participatory research and philosophical argumentation. The first part, “Explaining Anarchism”, argues that it should be addressed primarily as a political culture, with distinct forms of organisation, campaigning and direct action repertoires, and political discourse and ideology. Largely discontinuous with the historical workers’ and peasants’ anarchist movement, contemporary anarchism has come together in the intersection of radical direct-action movements in the North since the 1960s: feminism, ecology and resistance to nuclear energy and weapons, war and neoliberal globalisation. Anarchist ideological discourse is analysed with attention to key concepts such as “domination” and “prefigurative politics”, with attention to the avowedly open-ended, experimental nature of the anarchist project. The second part, “Anarchist Anxieties”, is a set of theoretical interventions in four major topics of controversy in anarchism. Leadership in anarchist politics is addressed through sustained attention to the concept of power, proposing an agenda for equalising access to influence among activists, and an “ethic of solidarity” around the wielding of non-coercive power. Violence is approached through a recipient-based definition of the concept, exploring the limits of any attempt to justify violence and offering observations on violent empowerment, revenge and armed struggle. Technology is subject to a strong anarchist critique, which stresses its inherently social nature, leading to the exploration of Luddism, the disillusioned use of ICTs, and the promotion of lo-tech, sustainable human-nature interfaces as strategical directions for an anarchist politics of technology. Finally, questions of nationalism are approached through the lens of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, addressing anarchist dilemmas around statehood, and exploring approaches to “national conflicts” that link multiple forms of oppression and that employ a direct action approach to peacemaking.

CHAPTER 8

UNHOLY LAND

ANARCHISM, NATIONALISM AND ISRAELI–PALESTINIAN PEACE

The Jewish masses in every country...have given unstintingly out of their earnings

in the hope that Palestine may prove an asylum for their brothers, cruelly

persecuted in nearly every European country. The fact that there are many non-

Zionist communes in Palestine goes to prove that the Jewish workers who have

helped the persecuted and hounded Jews have done so not because they are

Zionists, but [so that Jews] might be left in peace in Palestine to take root and live

their own lives...Perhaps my revolutionary education has been sadly neglected, but

I have been taught that the land should belong to those who till the soil.

Emma Goldman, letter to

Spain and the World (London, 1938)

T

his final chapter differs from its predecessors in opening up a relatively new and
unexplored topic for anarchists – their attitude to anti-imperialist struggles abroad. In

this debate, the prism of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is offered as a case study in

which some of the most interesting theoretical issues that anarchists confront are

refractured. This chapter asks which approaches would make sense for anarchists

regarding such struggles, with which they often express solidarity despite their

“nationalist” overtones. In this chapter I also employ a speaking voice that is now

doubly engaged – as an Israeli anarchist activist/scholar. I begin with a critique of the

scant anarchist polemical writing on Palestine/Israel,

* which is overwhelmingly “old
school”, and criticise the authors’ lack of an action-oriented approach and adherence

to antiquated formulations. Reviewing the traditional anarchist critique of

nationalism, I then tackle what seems to be the overriding anarchist dilemma in the

present context – the question of attitudes towards statehood, which has not received

*

The terms Israel/Palestine and Palestine/Israel interchangeably refer to the land west of the Jordan river.
295

much attention in anarchist writing. Here, I examine four reasons why anarchists can,

without contradiction, be seen to “support” the statist independence claims of an

occupied people. I then analyse three “threads of intervention” in the social movement

activity of anarchists and their allies in Israel/Palestine – linking issues, direct action

and grassroots peacemaking – which can indicate directions for an anarchist strategy

in the region.

Anarchism and Nationalism

With the conflict in Palestine/Israel so high on the public agenda, and with

significant domestic and international anarchist involvement in Palestine solidarity

campaigns (see later), it is surprising that the scant published anarchist contributions

on the topic remain, at their best, irrelevant to the concrete experiences and dilemmas

of movements in the region. At their worst, they depart from anarchism all together.